Durban - South Africa will on Wednesday learn Public Protector Thuli Madonsela's findings on the R206m upgrade to President Jacob Zuma's Nkandla home - but Zuma
will likely survive unscathed, experts predicted.

Madonsela's long-awaited and heavily
contested report into the affair that has dominated headlines for more than two
years is expected to show that Zuma misled Parliament, among other findings.

Leaked details of the preliminary report published at the
end of last year indicated that Madonsela will ask Parliament to sanction the
president personally on at least two counts, among her other findings.

Slap on the wrist

However, on Tuesday experts said that even if Madonsela
found Zuma had misled Parliament, he was likely to get little more than a slap
on the wrist as a result of her findings.

They said the Constitution only provided for the removal of
the president when they were found incapable of carrying out their duties or
found guilty of a criminal offence.

“I don’t think the drafters of the Constitution had
envisaged a situation where a president could mislead Parliament, but a case
can still be made in that regard,” political analyst Prince Mashele said.

Mashele said if it was found that Zuma misled Parliament,
the institution had two options. “The speaker can demand that he make an
apology and reprimand him. The other option is to call for the president to
resign,” he said.

He was convinced that the opposition would prefer the
president’s resignation while the ANC would prefer the apology

“I would not think the ANC would want the matter to be
discussed. There would not be an apology to discuss considering that Parliament
is to be dissolved before the elections,” Mashele added.

Mashele also said while there could be some within the ANC
who may be unhappy with Zuma, there was no grouping within the ruling party
that would call for the president to be sacked.

“The block the president belongs to is too strong so they
would take stern action against those who may harbour those feelings. It would
be a muted backlash,” Mashele said.

Possible legal action

But Shadrack Gutto, constitutional law expert from Institute
of African Renaissance at Unisa, said while the Constitution did not provide a
remedy for a president misleading Parliament, the law-making body could use its
discretion on how to tackle the matter.

“Parliament can pass a resolution asking him to repay, but
knowing that the ANC is in [the majority in Parliament] I don’t think that will
happen,” Gutto said.

He said should no action be taken against Zuma, it would
open the way for civil society to take legal action in the courts to force the
president to repay money spent at his homestead.

“If he is not removed, he will have to account and repay,”
he said, adding that the state institutions would have to recoup any money used
illegally.

Advocate Paul Hoffman, director of the Institute for
Accountability in Southern Africa, said Madonsela’s report was in all
likelihood going to find that Zuma misled Parliament.

“If that is the case there will be a difficult situation for
the president similar to when he faced 783 charges in 2009,” Hoffman said.

He said Zuma may challenge the adverse finding just as he
did with the criminal charges he had faced before he became the president.

'There will be criticism'

Independent political analyst Professor Sipho Seepe agreed
that Zuma may be within his rights to have the Public Protector findings
reviewed by court.

“We wait to see if she won’t be challenged on having rushed
her findings. She can rest assured that there will be criticism,” Seepe said.

Hoffman also said the ANC was likely to rally behind Zuma
and not push for his resignation.

“It is unlikely the ANC will have a change of heart so soon
after Mangaung conference.”

The experts said they did not foresee any backlash against
Madonsela or her office if she made adverse findings against Zuma barring
public attacks from the ANC.

Gutto said intimidation to weaken the Public Protector’s
office may well be in store for Madonsela, but there was no way that she could
be removed unless Parliament was manipulated.

“The Public Protector and Auditor-General can be removed on
the grounds of incapacity and misconduct, but she conducted herself very well,”
he said, adding that a two-thirds majority would be required to pass a
resolution.

24.com publishes all comments posted on articles provided that they adhere to our Comments Policy. Should you wish to report a comment for editorial review, please do so by clicking the 'Report Comment' button to the right of each comment.

Tell us a bit about yourself:

Saving your profile

Settings

News24 allows you to edit the display of certain components based on a location.
If you wish to personalise the page based on your preferences, please select a
location for each component and click "Submit" in order for the changes to
take affect.

Your Location*

Weather*

Always remember my setting

Saving your settings

Facebook Sign-In

Hi News addict,

Join the News24 Community to be involved in breaking the news.

Log in with Facebook to comment and personalise news, weather and listings.